Hacker News Reader

Comment by lasfter | Hacker News Reader

I detest that it has become normalized to grant tech companies access to personal data with only limp promises that it won't be misused.

If you give Fig permissions to look at what you are typing into the terminal, you should be prepared for them to look at what you are typing into the terminal and use it how it best serves them. They're asking for more permissions than that of course.

Imagine giving FedEx a copy of your house keys "just so they can guarantee safe delivery" without any legal recourse if the delivery people decided to help themselves to the contents of your fridge, or make photocopies of your documents.

View on HN

Wait. Does this mean that you are against the use of any tech product made by a company? From the description and the author comment it looks like they are not transmitting the keystrokes to their server (and it does not seem to have any need for it anyways). How is this different from using say, a compiler made by a company (they have access to all your code), or an image editor (they have access to all your photos).

If I can sign a binding contract that regulates how my data will be used for as long as I have this software then I'm happy to use most products.

Your examples don't capture what is happening here. Fig is freely downloadable, with implicit terms of use. They can say whatever they want in HN comments, but that has no bearing on what the software will actually do. If I buy a compiler, I get explicit terms of use. If I use an open-source compiler, I know what I'm using and I can change it if it's doing something sketchy, or roll back if it updates in some way I don't like. I wouldn't use a proprietary compiler I didn't pay for. Image editors too. And you can bet I wouldn't let either of those use the network (why do they need to?)

Moreover, the potential harm of my code or my images being leaked is much smaller than every keystroke into the terminal being leaked. Not even saying anything about Fig requiring access to other aspects of your machine too. So even if Fig did have a binding contract I'd be wary, because if the app gets exploited the consequences could be devastating.

Theoretically you are right. I wouldnt give Fig access.

But the world moved on without us.

Lets be honest: For 99.9% of users, no misuse ever happens which they care about.

I disagree in part, because this tool is not meant for the common user.

Is there another way to achieve what the product tries to do? Genuinely asking.

This covers most of the listed features.

https://github.com/Aloxaf/fzf-tab

I know about zsh-autosuggestions and fzf - I wanted to ask that as a developer building something like Fig, is there a way to build the same thing with less permissions than they currently have?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com